Status
Not open for further replies.
Its funny how Empire gets All the love.. from me too.
I dont know if its because it upped the anti introduced pretty dark scary images to us kids
It made a pretty big impression on me at five years old, I can say that. It took the setting and characters established in the first film and basically said, "I told you that story to tell you this one..." Star Wars was set-up -- the Hero coming into his own, his support structure being introduced and given some dimension... And then, once we had that, they got thrown into some Serious ****™. Absolutely it raised the ante -- but well. The characters that we'd met acquired more depth and nuance. Even the Falcon became more of a character. The presentation was pitch-perfect, with the score and the visuals and color saturation and costumes and everything. It was the best possible payoff for those of us who had seen the first one and become intrigued by the setting and characters and possibilities. And we got left with a multipartite cliffhanger (Vader is Luke's dad? Does Luke finish his training? What happens to Han? Who does Leia end up with?).

Expectations had to be carefully managed to provide a satisfying payoff to all that and, for a lot of us, Jedi wasn't it. I'm one of those who found it good and all, but there was something... off... about it that niggled at me and took me years to start parsing out. An off-ness that I did not feel with the other two, even with practical questions that came up in subsequent viewings (How did the Falcon get to another star system without hyperdrive? Just how long was Luke on Dagobah? How long was the trip from Tatooine to Alderaan, anyway? Etc.).

Moral ambiguity works for certain characters, not all of them. A character can be flawed without being morally compromised but the lack of subtlety in a lot of modern stories, or mostly "reimagined" existing characters is to take them and imbue them with qualities they never had, or to magnify their worst qualities and redefine these as virtues. This tendency seems to be the reflex of the modern era of films where the prevailing culture tries to comfort itself by creating works of fiction that celebrate subversion and lack conviction to any sense of moral duty or allegience to anything other than self. It may sound a bit extreme but how often do characters in recent years act in ways that are self serving rather than hold to a cause or belief that rejects such things?

Generally speaking, art is a reflection of the attitudes and beliefs of the time in which they are made. We live in a world where young people are taught that "their truth" is more important than truth itself. Where their desires are always acceptable and no one should question it. Where institutions are all corrupt and should be dismantled. They are taught that their enemy is out in the ether rather than consider the possibility that perhaps their enemy is the consequences of the poor choices they make. Taking personal responsibility for your actions is more important than posting your feelings on social media and considering it activism.

So what's the end result of the art that these attitudes create? You get heroes whose trials are not actually trials but mirrors with which to reflect the perceived strengths of their own awesomeness. Their antagonists are easily defeated because the protagonist already has the tools and knowledge to overcome them without true opposition and the saddest part is that there is no growth for these types of heroes because they've sacrificed nothing to achieve everything. Without death of some kind, whether it's literal or psychological there is no meaning behind it. The stories become as vapid as the culture and the cycle feeds the culture by marketing these things as aspirational when they are anything but. True heroism requires sacrifice of one kind or another.
It is stupidly ironic that the grim cynicism of the '70s in film was exactly what Lucas was fighting back against by wanting to do an escapist adventure fantasy. He wanted to inject a little hope into the societal bleakness he saw all around him. And here we are again. "Die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain."
 
Let Lindlehof make a Star Wars movie.
Let Rian make his trilogy.
Get Dumb & Dumber back on the line, let them make their Star Wars trilogy, too.
Might as well. Star Wars is already a soulless husk of what it once was.
I've divorced myself from all of it.
I'm just curious to see how moronic it can possibly get, and how many gullible fans will eat up and defend whatever slop they're served.
 
It made a pretty big impression on me at five years old, I can say that. It took the setting and characters established in the first film and basically said, "I told you that story to tell you this one..." Star Wars was set-up -- the Hero coming into his own, his support structure being introduced and given some dimension... And then, once we had that, they got thrown into some Serious ****™. Absolutely it raised the ante -- but well. The characters that we'd met acquired more depth and nuance. Even the Falcon became more of a character. The presentation was pitch-perfect, with the score and the visuals and color saturation and costumes and everything. It was the best possible payoff for those of us who had seen the first one and become intrigued by the setting and characters and possibilities. And we got left with a multipartite cliffhanger (Vader is Luke's dad? Does Luke finish his training? What happens to Han? Who does Leia end up with?).

Expectations had to be carefully managed to provide a satisfying payoff to all that and, for a lot of us, Jedi wasn't it. I'm one of those who found it good and all, but there was something... off... about it that niggled at me and took me years to start parsing out. An off-ness that I did not feel with the other two, even with practical questions that came up in subsequent viewings (How did the Falcon get to another star system without hyperdrive? Just how long was Luke on Dagobah? How long was the trip from Tatooine to Alderaan, anyway? Etc.).


It is stupidly ironic that the grim cynicism of the '70s in film was exactly what Lucas was fighting back against by wanting to do an escapist adventure fantasy. He wanted to inject a little hope into the societal bleakness he saw all around him. And here we are again. "Die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain."
Now I think I cant have watched ROTJ for quite a long time..
Empire I watch at least a few times a year and more for reference and dont have any problems with the cloud city embellishments..
But I just watched ROTJ and thought.. I dont remember this or that then realised it must be the SW Special Editions shown on Disney +
Now I must have watched this countless times with my kids and remember my son buying me the BlueRay disc set when they came out but Blimey!.. the extras really jars in ROTJ with all the edits the super imposed Fett amongst things not forgettingthe Vader saying Nooòo! Pft.. dont remember that at all.
The funny thing is...I still remember a scene in the Pirate copy I watched back in 83 where a resistance craft damaged takes out Vaders Imperial vessel turret and it explodes as in that moment the video goes all wonky and Re starts up on Endor ( it was cut to fit it on a 2 hour tape)

Memories are funny old things..
 
I would wager that many of Z's views are from people who want to see what idiotic thing he says next. The problem with this is even if you're making fun of it or saying how wrong it is, discussing his content to any degree at all supports him. Unfortunately he's getting the last laugh.
 
Never change, Mike Zeroh…

41A3572D-5485-4BCA-B42C-DB5B908A26BC.jpeg


….never change.

78E3A511-6CB2-405B-8357-1C89EBE101F7.jpeg
 
A little off topic, but I don't watch "YouTubers" (ugh, I hate that word) like a lot of people do, so I'm unaware of the "famous" (or infamous) ones out there. I know it's a fact of life now, but I just can't stand that there are so many talentless people getting tons of views and followers (and money) out there with minimal effort, while there are people with actual talent and abilities - for which they've spent years of training and education on - that toil in anonymity while the "successful" ones reap the benefits of being lucky and getting in early on YouTube, or however they've managed to build a following. I realize more and more that life isn't "fair," but I still don't like seeing it, and social media just seems to amplify it.

Not to impune all of them - I'm sure there are some talented people that work hard and have also gotten recognition through social media - but it's such a wasteland than I can't bring myself to slog through it to find the "good" ones. The videos I have seen tend to be unoriginal and derivative, apeing the presentation, editing, and content of each other. I guess the same can be said for other "traditional" forms of media, but I feel there's usually more effort and talent put into a lot of those.

Okay, "old man rant" over.
 
Slightly off-topic but watched Wonder Woman 1984 on Netflix.

Honestly, I dont think Patty Jenkins is that bad of a writer as she was previously made out to be. Yes there was a "feminism" streak but its Wonder Woman, ofcourse there is to appeal to younger girls. The movie was way too long and needed a good editor and script doctor to streamline and flesh out the themes but the theme was interesting. I did think there was a general misunderstanding of the main theme of "we shouldnt wish for shortcuts but put in the hard work to achieve our goals" when it was more "we should learn to be grateful of what we already have as opposed to constantly want and wish for more" although that also wasnt clear (as well as several plot holes that required the viewer to fill in like why Steven resurrected in another man's body while nukes can be created out of thin air).

I still dont know how I feel about the upcoming Rogue Squadron movie though. She apparently loves jet fighters and seems to know a bit about the culture so could make an interesting movie. She also apparently contacted the author of Rogue Squadron Michael Stackpole for story.


However, she is complaining about micro-management from Kennedy and plot point by committee process. I wonder if this is a new thing after the ST or if this was during the ST but either way, Kennedy is bad for Star Wars and Lucasfilm in general imo.

If she is this involved in the story-making process, her lack of knowledge of Star Wars is appalling. She should be aware of the comics, books, games, and interviews with Lucas on his thoughts. His script notes and treatments should be bibles, and she should be an expert on Star Wars and Indiana Jones lore (the two major Lucasfilm properties).

Maybe it was because everything was referred to Lucas who was the head honcho and ideas man but Lucasfilm now really needs a rehaul.
 
WW84 was an incoherent mess, which is a real shame because the first film, while long, was a breath of fresh air when it comes to the superhero genre. Plus it was long overdue to have such an iconic character in her own movie. After it was announced that Jenkins would be making a dogfight movie set in a galaxy far, far away I was pretty optimistic. She made WW which I enjoyed so much that I bought it, which says a lot because I don't buy many movies anymore. Her father served as a pilot and she heard stories from him as well as having that emotional attachment to her dad, and the experience of being the child of a service member so it gave the announcement of her as the writer and director some serious weight for me.

Then WW84 happened. I understood the basic concept of what they were trying to say thematically, but it was so poorly executed. Continuity problems abound and motivations as well as some serious ethical questions were all issues and my confidence in the idea of Jenkins writing and directing this Star Wars movie began to falter because she'd written WW84. I thought she had written WW but she only directed it. Couple those factors with the setbacks reported very shortly after the teaser trailer announcement of the project and it did nothing instill me with faith that it would ever come together. The reports were so gloomy in fact that without a release date there seemed to be an indication that it would never see the light of day.

And yes, this IS a problem with the Disney era of Lucasfilm. This is nothing new. Writers come and go, directors are fired and replaced. Projects are announced with ferver and then either delayed with production woes, or shelved entirely as if they were a bad dream or they get repackaged as some new product like a television series. Need anyone be reminded of Solo? Forget the movie itself but just the journey it took to get finished was a disaster. Flat out disaster. So it's not conjecture or hyperbole to say that these films and shows have some serious structural issues related to Kennedy and the fracture within Lucasfilm between those who respect Lucas's work and those who only care about the bottom line.

That's not to say there haven't been some successes, but I think it's naive to think there isn't something seriously wrong within the Lucasfilm camp, despite the false veneer of positivity they want to convince everyone is real.

As for Rogue Squadron I don't think this article really amounts to much if I'm being honest. Sure it's a nice gesture that she approached Stackpole, but if you consider that so much of the canon has been changed, jettisoned, or ignored completely I don't know how much of his material would even make it to the screen, assuming of course that this project ever gets finished.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top